Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-10-19 City Council (9)City of Palo Alto City Manager’s Rep, TO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT DATE:OCTOBER 19, 1998 CMR:403:98 SUBJECT:FINAL REVISION OF THE INTERIM HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMPATIBILITY REVIEW STANDARDS RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached Resolution revising the Compatibility Review Standards of the Interim Historic Preservation Regulations. BACKGROUND On October 13, 1998, staff advised and Council endorsed several minor changes to Exhibit "A," which has been revised. DISCUSSION Following is a list of changes indicated by staff and endorsed by the Council on October 13, 1998. 1) Section I (also under Background): Date changed to October 19. 2) 3) Section I, Introduction, Projects Subject to Compatibility Review Standards: Paragraph 2 changed to be consistent with Interim Ordinance definition of "demolition" (page 3). Same section: Reference to "minor projects" identifies exemption from Merit Evaluation (page 4). 4)Section II, Verify the historic status of your residence: Cross reference to "minor project" exemption included (page 6). 5)Section II, Proceed through the Historic Merit Evaluation Process: Paragraph expanded to be consistent with definition of "demolition" (page 7). CMR:403:95 Page 1 of 2 6)Section V, Part I, Driveway location and street trees: This requirement now reflects the correct distance between driveways and existing street trees, per PAMC Section 8.04.020. The note regarding street tree distance was deleted (page 18). 7)Section V, Part 2, Daylight plane: Add sentences "It is not necessary to comply with the Front Daylight Plane requirements in the Zoning regulations" (page 23). RESOURCE IMPACT Resource impacts are no greater than disclosed in previous reports concerning changes to the staffing and implementation of the Interim Historic Preservation Ordinance and Regulations. Staff believes that Council adoption of the revised Standards and staff implementation of the improved application materials will increase efficiency of responding to public inquiries and processing applications associated with the Compatibility Review Standards. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The recommendation does not represent any change to Council’s previous direction. TIMELINE Being adopted by Resolution, the proposed changes would go into effect immediately. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed changes are minor enough to be exempt from environmental review. ATTACHMENTS Resolution, with Exhibit "A," Compatibility Review Standards PREPARED BY: Anne Cronin Moore DEPARTMENT .- G. EDWARD GAWF Director of Planning and Community Environment CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: EMILY Assistant City Manager CMR:403:95 Page 2 of 2 Attachment A RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING HISTORIC PRESERVATION REGULATIONS INCLUDING COMPATIBILITY REVIEW STANDARDS WHEREAS, on October 28, 1996, the Council adopted an ordinance entitled, "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO ADDING CHAPTER 16.50 TO THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH INTERIM REGULAT;ONS GOVERNING HISTORIC DESIGNATION AND DEMOLITION OF RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES BUILT BEFORE 1940 AND REVIEW OF THE DESIGN QUALITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY OF REPLACEMENT STRUCTURES"; and WHEREAS, the above-referenced ordinance required the Director of Planning and Community Environment to promulgate written HiStoric Preservation Regulations to facilitate implementation of theordinance; and WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Regulations must include compatibility Review Standards and Standards for Historic Designation; and WHEREAS, on October 28, 1996, the Council adopted Resolution No. 7631, which approved Historic Preservation Regulations including the Compatibility Review Standards which were Exhibit "A" to that resolution, and Standards for Historic Designation which were Exhibit ~B"; and WHEREAS, on April 8, 1997 and August i0, 1998, the Council adopted Resolution Nos. 7660 and 7790, which amended the Historic Preservation Regulations including the Compatibility Review Standards; and WHEREAS, Council has directed and staff has recommended modifications to the Historic Preservation Regulations in order to accomplish several.streamlining and process improvement objectives; and WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed the proposed amended Historic Preservation Regulations; NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows: SECTIQN I. The amended Compatibility Review Standards attached to this Resolution as Exhibit "A" are hereby approved. These Standards replace in their entirety the Compatibility Review Standards approved by. Council by Resolution No. 7790. 980924 bdc 0052083 ~LQ3!~. The Historic Preservation Regulations approved by this Resolution shall be published and distributed to the public as an appendix to the Palo Alto Municipal Code. SECTION 3. The Council finds that this resolution does not constitute a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act because it can be se%n with certainty that there is no possibility of a significant effect on the environment. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST:APPROVED: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Mayor City Manager City Attorney Interim Director of Planning and Community Environment 980924 bd¢ 0052083 2 COMPATIBILITY REVIEW STANDARDS Design Requirements and Recommendations for the Replacement or ~Alteration of Pre-1940 Contributing Residences City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment Department COMPATIBILITY REVIEW STANDARDS Table of Contents II III I I~./VV I.~./^^"~ %J~JIIIIJGli, ll./illl.] I\~..,vI~VV %,/i,I;ll I~.i[~llt, J~,.] , ..................~ If you have any questions or require any clarification regarding the information within this document please contact the Planning Division at (650) 329-2441. Section I" Introduction Background and Purpose of the Compatibility Review Standards In the first nine months of 1996, permits were granted for 62 single family houses in Palo Alto to be demolished and replaced with new houses. Thirty-four of these houses were constructed before 1940 and located mostly in the city’s older, more traditional neighborhoods. Concerned that the loss of so many older houses would erode the distinctive character of these neighborhoods, the City Council adopted Interim Regulations to limit or restrict demolition of houses that have historic significance, either as Landmarks or as Contributors to the h~storic character of the neighborhood, to encourage sensitive rehabilitation of older homes, and to assure that in cases where these houses are demolished the houses that replace them will contribute the same quality of design and compatibility with neighborhood characteristics as the original houses. Thc:.~ provisions ~b@~G~patibility Rb~ieW~Sta~d~rds help to assure current and future residents that the character of their neighborhood will not undergo radical change, and to protect the investments that residents have made in their houses and neighborhoods. I’Q -,-,.^ ,-.^.~.__,:,-,,:,.. ,=^..: ....o,^_.~^...^ .,^ _^, ^__,.. t~, Remodels a~a~diti~ns;it0 Landmark Historic Residences and buildings within historic districts such as Professorville~hese G,.........~o are subject to The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic (The following text was removed from previous Section III) (Insert Former Figure 4 photograph of house in a garden setting) Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 4 October 14, 1998 Section I1: How" to ",;3~ t,,~ "". Consider an addition to or remodel of your residence. Before you decide to demolish and replace your-heuse residence, consider whether an addition or remodel will meet your household’s needs. An addition to or remodel of your older house residence which respects your residence’s original characteristics will help to preserve the distinctive historic architectural qualities of your neighborhood and the City of Palo Alto. Read Section IV,!i~Additi~i~Si~tid R~d~l~!’-~t~l~- .....""^" ": ........= ...." detail the opportunities and benefits of additions/remodels As y~,u c~,m,,pl~t~ ’"-,, ,~ ",-,~,, ....,,v=,,~,,,,,x’"";""’ ’^’^’"^’^^" ;- °^^’=^- ’" and to consider the special characteristics of your--heuse~-resi~e and how it contributes to the special character of the neighborhood. Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 5 October 14, 1998 Verify that your house was constructed prior to 1940. Consult the Assessor’s data, available on microfiche in the Planning Department, which will show the date of construction for your house..N~-.~u~t~, ~’.iif~yo~i.fe§!ii!~i~ the City of Palo Alto’s current Historic Inventoryi b~;SeCti~h ~6:50!020:i!(~i~iof,ilnt~i~:~!~i~dina~n~e~ ~ Find out whetheri~,re~i~:ce-it has been identified in the Inventory as a structure with historic architectural or cultural significance. Structures identified as Category 3 or 4 will require an Historic Merit Evaluation to assess their level of historic significance. -Structures identified as Category 1 or 2 are considered to be Historic Landmark Residences Proceed through the Historic Merit Screening Process. required follow........................................ u ........, ......you are not to tibility "-’~-:~’- ---’.. ’-the Compa Review Standards, or r~qwr~m~nta .........~,,x ................ Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 6 October 14, 1998 (Insert Former Figure 1 photograph of contributing building) Compatibility Review Standards Strike.outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 7 October 14, 1998 (Insert Compatibility Review Process Flowchart) o,..,.,.,,.,,,o,.,, ,,,~ ,., ....~.,,=, ....,,.,,, ,,v,.,,,, ....., \,.,,~,.,,,,.,,, -- ,.1 , ,,,,,,,,.,,, ~^~^’""---’ ""~’^’~" ......t ......~A--:-’-- ’..^,^:-- --A" --. --l----A--t. Of the 3) Compatibility Review Standards Strike.outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 8 October 14, 1998 Compatibility Review Standards Strikeooutsldouble underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 9 October 14, 1998 (Insert Former Figure 2 photograph of bungalow courts) .............. ~, ..............F ......h...... ~,.,,, ... catta,~c ,,,,,,.’t .............. ’":-’ ...."- -": ......................; ......" *’-- ’=’"---’-’~" may -^’- ’-"mu.,~,,~ ,~,,,~.~, ~.,,-.-...~x ~,,d ~,,~,~..~..~,,,~,,,~,,to ;a .,,~ ..,.~,,,.~,..,~,,~,~ ..~ appropriate "~’^ ~ .....’: ......: ..............:": ....’ ....~’^^’: ......""-=’ ...."~ ^ -’--:-:^- "’" ’~’^ ’~’---’-- ""^^" ....’--"~’"^ -’^^" ....An exception may be approved based upon findings that: (I) site conditions cause unusual circumstances that make application Of the Standards an unreasonable burden, and the proposed alternative better achieves design quality and compatibility with the existing neighborhood than would the strict application of the tibility " ........."~ ^" ....’" .......requirements of the Compa Standards .....~., ~,~. ....................x .~ ~i ~v~. include the following: (a) a comprehensive written description of the requested exception, (b) a description of the unusual site conditions, and © a description of the improvements in design quality and compatibility, if any, that would result. Compatibility Review Standards Strike.outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 10 October 14, 1998 At ~is.H~Sd~gi!.the E~eption.:~i!!:~:~.!d~ b~ the Zoning Administrator, Chief Building Official and the Chief Planning Official. A decision will be provided in writing within ten (10) days after the hearing, and ~-aly~heg-be appealable as provided in Palo Alto Municipal Code sections 16.50.080 and 16.50.120. Remodeling or adding on to an existing-heuee:.re~id., e~e may be the best alternative for households that need more space or have changing requirements. There may be an opportunity to improve the layout of the entire house and to enhance compatibility with the neighborhood, By retaining elements of the original homes and continuing their architectural character, in additions, remodeled ~ .~e~!~e~~. can preserve Palo Alto’s precious architectural heritage and the charm and desirability of older neighborhoods. You may also want to explore tax incentives for restoration and rehabilitation of historic buildings. (Insert Former Figure 3 photograph of remodel) Compatibility Review Standards Strike=outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 11 October 14, 1998 Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outsldouble underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 12 October 14, 1998 ~ to the -,~-character of the pre-1940 neighborhood Am-~Hi~’~-e-f-"Recommended practices""~Niti-hetp to preserve and enhance-thet Part 1:Streetscape and i,N~g~b’~h=~ ~,,, ,g, The front and side yards, location of your. residence/garages, location of the driveways, street trees and public rights-of-ways, landscaping, and everything in front of the-heuse~i~S!~e~ all contribute to our experience as we walk or drive down the street. This combination of elements constitutes the streetscape. The streetscape of older Pal. Alto neighborhoods is characterized by a high degree of architectural variety and pedestrian detail, unified by certain characteristic patterns of landscaping and building placement. (Insert Former Figure 5 photograph) Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 13 October 14, 1998 Front and street side setback~deytig/Pt3~efle. Existing patterns: ¯ The front setback is the distance from the front of the house to the front property line (not the sidewalk). The minimum setback established by the zoning regulations is 20 feet. However, in historic neighborhoods with a different setback pattern a smaller or larger setback pattern may prevail, and should be respected by new construction. ¯Many traditional house styles have tall front facades that cannot meet the Front Daylight Plane Requirements in the zoning regulations. Recommended Dractice: ° Maintain the existing setback pattern by building to the prevailing setback line. Notice that corner houses may be located closer to the street than other houses on the block. Requirements: Locate at-least ia;L~i~!~f 50% of the front facade of the-heuse,,t~.~i~l~e at the prevailing setback line, with the remainder of the front facade at or behind that line. If the house i~e~!~e is on a corner and the original residence is located closer to the street than the prevailing setback line, then the required front setback is the front setback of the original residence. Side setback requirements set by zoning apply unless the original street side facade is being retained. If the front facade of the original-heuse is being preserved, the setback of the original residence may alternatively be the allowed setback. Similarly, if the street side facade of a-heuse ~.~ on a corner lot is preserved, the setback of the original residence is considered the allowed setback. Compatibility Review Standards Strike=outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 14 October 14, 1998 Garages Existing patterns: ¯ In most pre-1940 neighborhoods, garages are separate from and located at the back of the lot. This pattern continues the outbuilding relationship to the main house that carriage houses had in a previous era. It has a powerful impact on the character of these neighborhoods ;n ^’ ......... w~,y3:ids,i~fO11oWS: (Insert Former Figure 6 photograph) ®the amount of paving in the front yard is the minimum required for access; the most prominent design element on the facade of the house is the entry or a major window rather than the garage; side driveways provide open space and separation between houses; cars can be parked in the driveway while still being out of the front yard; and, the difference in size between houses and garages establishes a pattern of variety in building volumes, rather than mostly large, uniformly sized buildings. Recommended practices: ¯Locate the garage to minimize its visibility from the street. °Design the garage to be architecturally compatible with the house but not competing with the house as the primary focus. (Insert Former Figure 7photograph) Requirements: Locate the garage at .the rear of the site and detached from the residence by at least ’12 feet. If located at least 75 feet from the front property line, zoning allows the garage to be located adjacent to the side and rear property line. Alternatively, the garage may be attached to the house provided that it is located no closer than 60 feet from the front property line, and that a side setback as determined by current zoning ordinances is maintained. (Insert Former Figure 8) The garage may project no more than ten feet (*) from the side facade of the residence, when viewed from the street, thus partially screening view of the driveway and garage from the street. No part of the second story can extend over the garage within ten feet of the garage side wall. The garage must have a separate roof that is the same pitch as the residence roof, or less. In this case, second floor balconies are not permitted over the garage, in order to protect the privacy of the adjacent property. (Insert Former Figure 9) Compatibility Review Standards, Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 15 October 14, 1998 If the residence is located on a corner, the garage may be placed in the rear yard setback and accessed from the side street. The garage must be located at least 16 feet from the street side property line. Alternatively, garages on corner lots may be attached if located outside the rear yard setback. The front o garage must be recessed at least 2 feet behind the street-facing side facade of the residence, unless it is necessary or desirable architecturally for the garage to be flush with the ~S.!~ -fr-e~t facade. ,~. ~i i!~dOe-si~tl0t!ii ~e In a single car garage, use a garage door that is 8 feet wide, or less. In a double car garage, use. two doors not more than 8 feet wide separated by a vertical support at least 8 inches wide, or use one door not over 16 feet wide. Where three car garages are permitted by ordinance, use one door eight feet wide and one door 16 feet wide, or less. Design garage doors with square or vertically proportioned elements to minimize the apparent width of the doors. If the door is more than eight feet wide, design the door so that it has the appearance of being divided vertically into two distinct sections. Do not use Rancher style doors, because the strong horizontal proportions emphasize the width of the door. Do not use steel garage doors. Do not use non- rectangular or decorative windows on garages or garage doors. -- ’~" ......’-’-- ^~ "--’ .......’:" "^ ~" ......’~’-- ’^-^’- "-^ "" .........fr_,;" t~a na ........................., ...........pattern c,f ~,p;n apaca between houses :- If alleyway access is available, required parking shall be accessed from the alley and the garage shall be located ~ ia~:i;{~t 5 feet-eF~ the rear property line. On substandard lots less than 50 feet wide or 80 feet deep, and where no alley access is available, only one on-site parking space is required and a single car attached garage is allowed. The front of the garage must be recessed at least two feet behind the main front facade of the residence. If two parking spaces are provided, one must be tandem. Carports are not permitted, unless they are located where the open sides cannot be seen from a public street. Driveways Existing pattern: Driveways at nearly all of Palo Alto’s pre-1940 houses are between 6.5 and 10 feet wide, with 9 feet being the most common width. They are typically located several feet from the side property line and several feet from adjacent building walls; usually this space is planted with a hedge or other landscaping. Traditionally, driveway Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 16 October 14, 1998 surfaces are treated in one of two ways. The most common treatment is a simple, unobtrusive surface of asphalt or poured cement. In other cases, the driveway is surfaced with bricks, cobbles, stones, rubble or gravel, and adds textural interest and an element of craftsmanship to the front garden. . . (Insert Former Figure 10) (Insert Former Figure 11) Recommended practice: ¯ Treat the driveway as a garden element. Minimize the width of the driveway and the amount of paving on the site. "Hollywood" strips, with planting between the wheel tracks,~ may be used insteadof solid paving. Use simple, traditional paving materials, and provide planting that will help to frame the site and screen the paving. Requirements: Make driveways 9 feet wide or less. Driveway curb cuts must have a vertical curb and be no more than 10 feet wide with a 3 foot radius. Within 27 feet of the garage doors, driveways may widen to no more than the width of the garage door(s) plus 2 feet. However, no driveway may be more than 12 feet wide within 5 feet of the public sidewalk. Interior sidewalks, patios, etc. may adjoin the driveway for no more than 6 linear feet~i.li~ i~ ~ Locate driveways at least 1.5 feet from the side or rear property line and at least 1.5 feet from the side of the house to provide space for planting on both sides of the driveway, except that no planting space is required between the driveway and the back half of the house. (An illustration or diagram will be provided). Use the following materials for driveway surfaces: asphalt;~~C~!~d {~it~ ~bi~¢~{~ with a troweled or exposed aggregate finish; real brick, cobbles, or stone; rubble; or gravel, ii~l~.i~s~tete~ii~recast interlocking pavers or stamped concrete that replicate cobblestone or brick are also allowed. "’"^ "~’; ............"~^-^ ’ ...... ...."-~ °" ’ ’ any ’~^^’=^- "--’ :- "’:’=’-’- " .......~":" ""^^’ .....=-’ ......" " ......h~d.g~ ~,’,r.,n.~ thr~ .....’~" Street trees and pubfic rights.of-way Existing pattern: ¯ Street trees are one of the most striking features of Palo Alto’s older neighborhoods. Trees provide shade and canopy and help define the street and sidewalk areas. They also provide a unifying element to the streetscape of older neighborhoods, while the variety of tree species used provide a range of shade, color and other characteristics. Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 17 October 14, 1998 The planted area within the strip between sidewalk and street provides water and nutrients to street trees and additional visual interest for the pedestrian, while screening views of the street paving from within the house. (Insert Former Figure 12) Recommended practice: ¯ Note the location, spacing and type of street trees on the street and take this .into consideration in the design of the new house, locations of garage and driveway and the design of landscaping and paving in the front yard and planting strip. Requirements: Do not relocate, realign or widen a driveway to within 10 feet of any existing street tree, unless it is not possible.to access the site and still meet this requirement, i:~ ~s~re#~[e~ ~4~ ~7...,~,~.~,~ i~i! If street trees are missing along the property frontage on the street, locate the driveway to allow replacement of the missing trees at approximately 25 feet Limit paving or hard surfaces.within the parking strip to no more than 5.5 linear feet per street frontage, not including the driveway apron. Provide irrigated planting of ground cover or small shrubs in the parking strip. If there is a fence or wall along the property line, provide irrigated planting in the space between the sidewalk and the fence or wall. Landscaping Existing pattern: ¯ Trees provide shade and canopy and provide an asset to both the individual property owner and the neighborhood. Mature trees and other large plant material are a part of. the special quality of older neighborhoods. Recommended practices: ¯ Locate and identify all mature trees and shrubs on the property. Observe their characteristics and what benefits they may be providing in terms of shade, seasonal color, etc. Consider that some may be old species no longer generally available in the trade and therefore rare. Retain and protect mature vegetation where possible. Design the landscape to be compatible with the house design and neighborhood. Be aware that irrigated front lawns are the main source of water for many street trees, so if drought tolerant landscaping is used, consider providing irrigation to the street trees. If irrigation to the front yard is being turned off during construction, use soaker hoses to water street trees.¯Consistent with neighborhood patterns, fence materials and design should be compatible with the house’s architectural style and neighborhood character. Solid fences and fences over four feet tall should be avoided, except to provide backyard Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page October 14, 1998 privacy. Locate perimeter fences or walls behind the property line to allow planting to soften the appearance of the fence. If there is an uninterrupted sweep of lawn across several properties, maintain this pattern. (Insert Former Figure 13) Requirements: ¯All valley oak and live oak trees over 11.5 inches in diameter or 36 inches in circumference measured 4.5 feet above natural grade that are located in required setbacks are protected under the City’s street tree ordinance and must be retained. ¯Prior to demolition and during construction, provide protective fencing and frequent deep watering to all plant materials that are being retained, including street trees. Part 2i Architectural S.~l~ei,~,,,,, ,~ ....,"". Palo Alto’s older neighborhoods are characterized by a combination of architectural styles, with certain styles predominant in each neighborhood. Each of these historic house styles is composed of a coherent and consistent combination of materials, window treatments, building massing, ornamentation and roof treatment. While individual details may vary, these characteristics provide a sense of unity within each house and with others Of the same style. Additions and remodels of pre-1940 houses should be compatible with the style of the original structure. A first step in designing a remodel or addition is therefore to identify the architectural style of the original home. Common Architectural Styles in Palo Alto Houses A number of architectural styles predominate in Palo Alto homes built before 1940. Illustrations and descriptions of character-defining elements of these styles can be found in Section V. These houses represent the history of this area, dating from the founding of the town of Mayfield and Palo Alto throughthe startof World War I1. While there are some other architectural styles represented in pre-1940 buildings, the list below includes the most common styles. This list is in approximate chronological order, with related styles grouped together. Within theses groups, styles influenced each other and are sometimes blended in a single building ~ ¯ Italianate Victorian, Queen Anne Victorian, Colonial Revival, Shingle Style, Craftsman and Bungalow. °Spanish Colonial/Mediterranean, Mission Revival and Spanish Eclectic. ¯Tudor and French Eclectic. °Moderne, Prairie Style and Minimal Traditional. (Insert Former Figure 14) Compatibility Review Standards, Strike.outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 19 October 14, 1998 Some of the predominant styles are particularly well adapted to the area’s climate and building materials, such as the Craftsman, Shingle and Spanish Colonial Revival styles. Prominent California architects such as Julia Morgan and Birge Clark have designed local homes in these styles which are an important part of Palo Alto’s distinctive architectural heritage. For further information on Palo Alto and Bay Area architectural traditions, consult the following references, available at the Planning Department and the Public Library, and local book stores: ¯Section V: Guide to Palo Alto Architectural Styles °Historic and Architectural Resources of the City of Palo Alto ¯Rehab Right: How to Utilize the Full Value of Your Old House ¯Single Family Residential Design Guidelines ¯A Field Guide to American Houses, by Virginia and Lee McAlester °House Styles in America by James C. Massey and S Shirley Maxwell ¯Dover Reprints of late 19th and early 20th century house design books Compatible architectural style Existing pattern: ° Each of Palo Alto’s older neighborhoods gets its distinctive character from a blend of architectural styles. Some neighborhoods and blocks are more eclectic and others are more homogeneous. Often there is a predominant style, such as the shingle style or bungalow style, which gives the neighborhood a sense of unity and distinctiveness. Recommended practices: ° Where possible, significant architectural features and street facades of the original house should be retained and the architectural style of the new construction should continue the materials, details, proportions and craftsmanship of the original house to produce a unified overall character. (Insert Former Figure 15) New residential construction should be compatible with the architectural character of the neighborhood. Each house should be designed with an understanding of the characteristic elements of the particular style selected for the house and with careful attention to scale, balance, proportion, detail and craftsmanship. When using characteristics of a traditional architectural style, use these characteristics in a consistent manner, rather than combining characteristics of a different style in a single structure. For example, Mediterranean/Spanish style stucco houses should not employ neocolonial details such as shutters or steep roofs. ~ndi~ta!!i -Where characteristics of related styles are often combined in Palo Alto homes, elements of these related styles " ~-e~ ~ into a unified composition. Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 20 October 14, 1998 Requirements: Style o Plans which use traditional architectural features are required to identify a style from the references: Section V: Common Palo Alto Architectural Styles; Historic and Architectural Resources of the City of Palo Alto; Rehab Rigb_ht; Single-Family Design Guidelines, A Field Guide the American Houses, House Styles in America, or Dover Reprints. Plans for a single structure must be predominantly consistent with the architectural characteristics of a particular style in the above references. Exceptions from the architectural characteristics of a particular style are permittedwhen the style is identified as having influences from another, related style in Palo Alto housesi Windows Existing patterns: ° Windows contribute a great deal to the character of the house. An addition that uses windows that are significantly different from those used in the original house will severely disrupt the character of the house. For instance, using sliding aluminum windows in a house that has wood double hung windows would detract from the architectural character of the house. °Certain distinctive window shapes, such as round, arched, pointed, fan-shaped or diamond-shaped windows, need to be used sparingly so that they complement the architectural style and do not overwhelm the proportions of the facade. Extremely tall windows can also disrupt the scale of the house. Most older residential styles did not use non-rectangular and oversized windows at all, or used them only for emphasizing the major living area or an entry.. (Insert Former Figure 16) Recommended practices: ¯ Each architectural style is characterized by specific window proportions, materials, mullion detailing, trim and placement. Refer to the description of common architectural styles and examples of original houses for models of appropriate window treatment for the architectural style of your proposed design. (Insert Former Figure 17) Requirements: ¯Where the architectural style of the original residence is being retained;-reuse-er ’^’;^’^ ~"- " "maintain proportions, detailing and materials of original windows. °No windows on street facades can be taller than the top of the first floor of the building, i~0~ !~end~ii~0111 Where non-rectangular windows are Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 21 October 14, 1998 used, they must be compatible with the architectural character of the house and neighborhood. This limitation does not apply to windows located on the front door. Windows must be wood, wood with vinyl or metal cladding, or steel. Vinyl or aluminum windows will be allowed for bathrooms and basements but must have the same or similar finish to other windows. Windows must have clear glass, except that glass block or frosted glass may be used in bathrooms or for privacy along property lines. .Windo~ details Windows with divided lights must be true divided lights, or double pane windows with full size ’-"-: ....o,o,, d~p)-muntins attached to the exterior and interior of the glass. {~:.t~;.{a~...,~..~5~;f!~i!~h~d. ~t~d~ ~1! (ek~!e.dih~::i~!~)~. In stucco walls, window panes should be recessed a minimum of 2.5 inches, "-":-"~1 III I~ [I I~ ~{~1~ ll~ll ~1 I~VVI I1~[ II1~1~111~ [11111 ~1~11~ ~11~ lllll~li~1 III ~1~1 ~ ~1111~11~ LII~ IIIIFI~I~II ~1 ~11~ ,~,,~."- In othertypes of walls a minimum recess of 1.5 inches is ~.~Jy required. Minor variations from these minimums due to manufactured window dimensions may be approved. ~otm~rs Dormer windows Front porches and entry features Existing patterns: ° Entry features in Palo Alto’s older neighborhoods include front porches, alcoves, loggias, terraces, and covered or uncovered stoops. Front porches can be viewed as covered entry features which are open on two or more sides. These front porches and entries often provide a seating area as well as an entryway, and become an important scene for neighborly interaction while providing visual interest to the passerby. They also provide a transition in scale between the house and the outdoors at the pedestrian scale. (Insert Former Figure 18) The materials, proportions and location of front porches, entries and primary windows should be compatible with the house style and neighborhood character. Requirements: Compatibility Review Standards Strike=outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Counc# Review Page 22 October 14, 1998 If there is an established pattern of porches on the block, (50 % of houses on the block face or on both sides of the street combined), then provide a front porch. If a porch is not incorporated, include an entry feature or principal window (larger than other windows) in a main living area on the front of the house, i’E~Jstihg~iPO~[q Design porches with a minimum dimension of at least 6 feet in depth and an area of at least 60 square feet to provide both an entry area and usable seating area. iM!~ir rch!tectum!~;sty!e, Entry feature openings ~ cannot be higher than the top of the first floor of the residence. Building massing Existing pattern: ¯ Building massing is a fundamental ingredient of architectural style and neighborhood character. While many houses in Palo Alto’s older neighborhoods are two stories, they often contain a number of elements which serve to decrease the visual impact of the two story volume with a one story portion, roof or gable details, articulated walls, or entry features. These features provide a pedestrian scale. The taller building elements and trees help define the larger scale of the street.’ Together these elements contribute to the overall character and richness of the streetscape. ¯ Building massing is also a key concern of neighbors, where two story elements can affect sunlight access, views and privacy for adjacent properties. Recommended practices: ° Employ one story elements such as porches, entry features, and arcades to create a transition in scale between the street and two story building elements Consider neighbor’s needs for sunlight, privacy and views. Use setbacks or sloping roofs to reduce shadows and intrusions on neighbor’s windows and open spaces. Building massing should be compatible with the house’s architectural style and neighborhood character. For example, for bungalow designs and other traditionally single-story houses avoid two story elements unless they are set back at least ten feet from front and rear walls.. (Insert Former Figure 19) Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct, 19 Council Review-Page 23 October 14, 1998 Roof design Existing patterns: Roof lines and the detailing of roof design and construction contributes .to the character of Palo Alto’s older neighborhoods. Generally, the existing pattern is houses composed of simple shapes with simple roof forms. Some newer houses have introduced a profusion of roofs over individual building elements, which clutter the facade. Roofs should not over-emphasize the garage or entryway to the detriment of the overall facade. ¯Roof forms found in Palo Alto vary from the shallow to moderate slopes of bungalow, shingle and Spanish Eclectic houses to the steep forms of Tudor and Victorian houses. Deep roof overhangs and details such as exposed rafters and repeating roof forms are distinctive features of Craftsman and Bungalow style houses, while other styles are characterized by different patterns of Overhang and detailing. Compatibility with neighborhood patterns and the specific architectural styles of the house should be continued in new construction. Traditional roof materials in older Palo Alto neighborhoods depended upon the architectural style. Shingle style houses used wood shingles and shakes; Spanish style houses used genuine clay tile, or tar and gravel for flat roofs; Tudor and neocolonial houses sometimes used slate. Recommended practices: Where roofs ....;-"’" ’-;-~"=^~"^’~ ^^¯are o~, ......~, ,,~, ,,,~ .......a prominent design feature, use .authentic, high quality materials such as wood shake,, wood shingle, clay tile or slate. ~l~ili~~ Requirements: Roof line, roof details and roof materials must be compatible with the!i~’.~i@!e~d architectural style t~, -’^’~ ............ " "-=~"^~ -’^~’=’^~ .... ’ ^""- ~- ’-^-’"’~,~,--~ .................. a r~Roof features must be consistent with those described for that style in the following references: Section!!;~!: Guide to Palo Alto Architectural Styles; Historic and Architectural Resources of the City of Palo Alto; Rehab Right; or Single-Family Design Guidelines. Alternatively, if an applicant can provide a local example of a pre,1940 residence with the same combination of architectural style and roof characteristics they may utilize that combination of character stics in their own .plans. The roofs over entry features must have the same roof!~. -piteh and detai!!~g as the rest of the house. Eaves on entry feature roofs must be located no higher than the top of the first floor of the building. !~!~e~~i~!~i !~!i~i!!a~!~i~~a~ ~irq~d~ Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 24 October 14, 1998 For roofs, use asphalt shingles, wood shingles, wood shakes, genuine clay tile, genuine slate, standing seam metal roofs, or tar and gravel or any shingle-style product, including composite shingle that have a compatible visual appearance. Walls and finishes Existinq pattern: ¯ An important characteristic of older neighborhoods is the generally high level of quality and craftsmanship used in construction and finishing of wall surfaces. Often the variations in color or texture resulting from hand craftsmanship add to the appeal and interest of the finished wall. In addition, certain stYles were marked by specific finishes, such as white, cream or other light colored paints on Stucco for Spanish style houses, and unpainted redwood shingles and beams on Shingle Style houses. Requirements: Stucco must be ~ag~tr~w~le.d.epptie6Jay~taf~ Do not use spray-on finish materials or textured paints. Use a traditional stucco finish texture found on pre-1940.buildings in Palo Alto, such as Float, Spanish, Mission, Monterey, Californian or English. Do not use Lace or heavy textures. Use real wood siding, not composite products, vinyl or aluminum siding. °Change from one wall material to another only where there is a change in wall plane and at an interior corner, not at an exterior corner, since this gives the appearance that the material is only applied to the surface and not integral to the structure of the wall. ~m~del~at~a!~ ............................... W~fie~"=~i:~Odeling, use same materials and finishes as existing house. If documentation exists showing that the house originally had a different finish, then that finish may be used. !i!,f!ith~!i~.~] ~t!~ ,=÷~.e ~!:l~!!~i ,~i~h (Insert Former Figure 20) ¯ Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 25 October 14, 1998 the ~" ........... ~-’^ Thera 1. A Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 26 October 14, 1998 Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 27 October 14, 1998 ~ ~af and Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 28 October 14, 1998 Section Guide to Palo Alto Architectural Styles and References References The Compatibility Review Standards are based on the following three reference documents. You may pick up copies of Historic and Architectural Resources of the City of Palo Alto and the Single Family Design Guidelines at the City Planning Department. All three references are also available at the Main Library. Additionally, several field guides and reprinted pattern books are available and provide useful information about historic residential buildings. ¯ Historic and Architectural Resources of the City of Palo Alto, City of Palo Alto, 1979. Historical description of Palo Alto architectural styles and neighborhoods. ¯Rehab Right, How to Realize the Full Value of Your Old House,. Helaine Kaplan Prentice and Blair Prentice, City of Oakland Planning Department, 1978, 1986 ¯Single Family Design Guidelines, City of Palo Alto Planning Department, 1991. ¯A Field Guide to American Houses, McAlester, 1996. Reference guide defining house architectural style using major characteristics. °House Styles in America, Massey, 1996. Reference guide defining house architectural style using major characteristics. ¯Dover Reprints, 1890s to 1930s, various authors. House design guide books published from the 1890s to the 1930s, and reprinted by Dover Publications, Inc. Palo Alto Architectural Styles ¯ The following text and illustrations provide a brief overview of some of the characteristics of the major architectural styles of houses found in Palo Alto. It draws on the suggested reference materials, particularly the publication "Historical and Architectural Resources of the City of Palo Alto." A number of the styles depicted below reflect influences of other styles from the same or earlier periods. This guide describe styles which are predominant in Palo Alto or which represent unique local conditions and traditions. Italiante Victorian. Predominant style in College Terrace and, Downtown. throughout older neighborhood !~] °2 stories typical °Frequent large front entry porch substantially above grade ¯Unusual massing with dormer projections, bay windows and porches °Vertical emphasis °Fanciful wood trim and siding ¯Materials: varied painted redwood siding and trim with shingle roof Queen Anne Vistorian. Predominant style in College Terracei~d some parts of Old Palo o o o o o o 1, 2 or 3 stories. Steep roof pitch, complex roof forms Picturesque asymmetrical plans, sometimes with corner towers, gables and bays Porch or veranda common Lacy wood ornament and trim with fish scale shingles, variety of textures Materials: contrasting wood siding materials with shingles Compatibility Review Standards Strike=outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 29 October 14, 1998 Colonial Revival. One of several styles in Profe~sorville, Crescent Park and Old Palo Alto o o o o o 1 or 2 stories. Medium to steep roof pitch, with hip or gambrel roofs Stately, regular massing, revival of Georgian plans and forms Use of Classical details such as pediments with columns, Palladian windows Raised pedimented portico entry Materials: horizontal wood siding or shingle siding, with shingle roof and wood window shutters Related styles: Greek Revival, Georgian Revival, Dutch Revival Shingle. Predominant style in: Professorville, Old Palo Alto, i~ Community Center. o o o o o o o Late 19th century architectural style with New England influences 1 or 2 stories with simple massing Walls and roofs are covered in unpainted redwood shingles and include curving surfaces Brackets common at eaves, along with deep overhangs Emphasis on wood craftsmanship and details Shingle siding with no corner trims, roofing originally shingles as well Irregular asymmetrical facade with steeply pitched roof, cross gables, and overhanging eaves sheltering extensive porches Wood windows with divided panes of glass (Insert Former Figure 21) Craftsman. Predominant style in: Professorville~.i~~ Community Center. : ¯Materials: unpainted redwood shingles and siding with massive redwood timbers, boulders, and clinker bricks; ¯Massing: generally low and horizontal ¯Roofs: Repeated shallow gabled roofs with wide sheltering overhangs, exposed rafters and supporting roof brackets °Architectural style arising from the late 19th and early 20th century Arts and Crafts movement which combined a respect for craftsmanship and natural material with a life lived close to nature Most often found in bungalows and two story structures employing overhanging roof lines with a horizontal emphasis. ¯Frequent use of redwood in simple pergolas, fences and other built elements which continue building style and blur the distinction between indoors and outdoors ¯Most of the homes were built prior to the 1940s. °Streets are lined with mature trees, which provide a unifying feature. °Landscape strips exist with street trees between sidewalk and street. °Lots are generally narrow with houses consistently set back on the lot. o Predominant architectural styles include the bungalow and craftsman style. ¯Front porches are common as are low fences with houses visible from the street. Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 30 October 14, 1998 Garages are generally detached and located in the rear of the lot with a narrow driveway to the street, minimizing views of parking areas and pavement. Bungalow. Predominant Style in: Boyce Addition, Community Center, Downtown North. Typic~!~.fe~!tures :~includ~ ¯Approximate original construction date 1900s to 1940s ¯Generally 1 story ¯Slightly raised large, deep entry porch on front of house ¯Shallow roof pitch and generally horizontal massing ¯Wood detail prevalent in details such as roof brackets, exposed rafters ¯Materials: wood siding, stucco, or shingles ¯Windows: true divided light windows, generally horizontal or square in shape, often with unusual mullion patterns repeated throughout house Spanish Colonial/Mediterranean. Predominant Style in Old Palo Alto, Crescent Park,~-~d Community Center. Popular style in 1915-1940 in California. ~y~!¢a!~f~_~u~s !~!_ud~: ¯ Many fine examples designed by Birge Clark, prominent local architect, which feature massive stuccoed walls with carefully irregular fenestration and ornamentation with colored tiles and wrought iron. ¯Asymmetrical building massing of one or two stories, often partially enclosing courtyards and incorporating arcades and pergolas. ¯Use of stucco or timbered arcades to create shade and indoor/outdoor transition ¯Massive looking walls with recessed windows ¯Shallow pitch tile roof, with hip or gabled roofs, some flat roofs with tile-covered shed roofs over windows and doors. ¯Colors - Light colored walls, red clay roof tiles, frequent use of colorful glazed tile as accent-Materials: stucco walls with heavy wood timbers, wood or wrought iron railings and clay tile roof ¯Windows: Occasional use of heavily recessed arched windows, sometimes in series. Windows generally composed on multi-panned metal or wooden casements. ¯Related styles: Mission Revival, Monterey style, Spanish Eclectic. (Insert Former Figure 22) Tudor. Found throughout Crescent Park, Community Center and Old Palo Alto. Characteristic of "estate" neighborhoods with traditional, more formal styles. o o ® o o o ® 20th century interpretation of English Tudor architectural Style 1 or 2 stories typical Vertical emphasis Steeply pitched roof, prominent front cross gable, all with shallow overhangs Sense of mass in walls with recessed windows Grouped windows with vertical emphasis, casements, with multi-pane glazing Materials: stucco walls, often with wood trim (half-timbering common) and accents Massive chimneys with one or more chimney pots Related styles: French Eclectic Compatibility Review Standards Strike=outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 31 October 14, 1998 Moderne. Popular in 1930s Streamlined and/or geometric detailing, often with curved lines Simplified detailing Asymmetrical massing Generally flat roofs with parapet terminus. Materials: generally smooth stucco walls, metal windows, horizontal emphasis Related styles: Streamlined, Prairie, Minimal Traditional Mixed. Examples ~ludelCollege Terrace, Ventura, Old South Palo Alto,~anld Downtown North. ~YP.i.ca! i.~!~e~ °Mixed or eclectic, neighborhoods are the least uniform in Palo Alto. ° ¯Amount of landscaping varies as does type and placement of street trees. °Mixed density and architectural style. On some blocks, there is no uniform pattern with respect to number of stories, lot size or garage location. °Nonetheless, elements of building appearance, size, placement on a lot and/or landscaping help unify diverse character and scale. Estates. Examples,!~!~ Crescent Parkia~ some parts of Old Palo Alto. o o o o Rural. o o o o Lots are very wide and large, with substantial houses set back 40 feet or more from the street, having large side setbacks. Trees and lush landscaping dominate the streetscape. Planter strips add to the rich greenery along the street. Predominant styles include Tudor, Colonial Revival and Mediterranean. Houses are two and three stories. Garages are detached in the rear. ~niexa~P!~!~, Barron Park. i~yl~i~fe~tu .i~i~Jgd~i: The character of rural neighborhoods is dominated by trees and foliage. There are many trees, but no uniform street tree type. The rural character is emphasized by the lack of curbs and sidewalks. Streets are rambling and narrow. The architecture is varied, but most houses are small, one story and set back from the street. Compatibility Review Standards Strike=outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 32 October 14, 1998 k I ^;^ I~ 1.,. ^,L ~ --,J kl^~^/^\ I~l~U~i n~J~,Jn i n~,Jv, J,.i i~~u u Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 33 October 14, 1998 2 -3 4 5 6 7 2 4 ,5 Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 34 October 14, 1998 Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 35 October 14, 1998 ~ Compatibility~Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 36 October 14, 1998 Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 37 October 14, 1998 Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 38 October 14, 1998 V VII Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines .Oct. 19 Council Review Page 39 October 14, 1998 Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. t9 Council Review Page 40 October 14, 1998 Section !~VI!:Acknowledgments Palo Alto City Council Gary Fazzino Joseph Huber Liz Kniss Dick Rosenbaum Micki Schneider ~lee-Gifl~t~ Lanie Wheeler Planning and Community Environment Department Staff Virginia Warheit, Senior Planner Compatibility Review Standards Preparation Alison Kendall, AICP, AK Planning & Design Virginia Warheit, Senior Planner, City of Palo Alto Dan Solomon, FAIA, Solomon, Inc. Palo Alto residents provided some of the photographs and contributed much other helpful information for the development of the Compatibility Review Standards. Compatibility Review Standards Strike-outs/double underlines Oct. 19 Council Review Page 41 October 14, 1998